I just received a phone poll that asked me seven questions related to Newton, including my opinion of Setti Warren, the Austin Street project and the possible development at the corner of Washington and Walnut Street.
But the most interesting two questions were about the Ward 2 At Large Alderman contest which stated that there were “three candidates” running for the position — Susan Albright, Marcia Johnson and Jake Auchincloss.
Yes, that’s right, the survey only wanted to know which of those three candidates I would vote for. There was no mention of the fact that there are actually five candidates running. Candidates Jess Barton’s and Lynne LeBlanc’s names were not mentioned and since it was a robo-poll there was no way to add them to the survey or answer “other.”
It’s t0ugh enough just to run, but when people mislabel or ignore you it’s worse. It’s terrible.
I’ve posed Jess with some tough questions and comments and she’s responded each time. I respect that. It’s not easy to put your name out there and it’s essential that candidates be treated with respect.
I really don’t see the big deal about this. I’ve kinda figured those 3 are the frontrunners. And it was a poll, not an impartial or fair exercise. It was put out for a political purpose. And if you view those 3 as the front-runners, wouldn’t you want to know how things stand for the final election and not the primary.
I guess this rises to the level of interesting, but hardly an example of push polling. But not exactly a scandal…More blog bait than anything else.
As for respect, I do respect Jess and Lynne for running. But politics ain’t beanbag, and running a poll with just the 3 could be Jake setting himself up as the lead opposition, or one of the incumbents wanting the information regarding a 3 way race, as they are confident of getting out of the primary. I certainly don’t see this as terrible or a sign of disrespect.
And there is an easy way to get respect. Win the primary. Have your Dewey beats Truman moment…
This is a bogus poll, simply if Jess and Lynne only get 10% of the total votes, thats 10% the top 3 don’t get. It skewers the results. Why bother with the poll if you don’t do it right?
I’ve been on the other end of this and not only does it suck, if you don’t get on top of it, it can be a prophecy.
It’s hardly a scandal. But someone’s being very presumptuous about who the top three candidates are when it appears that 5 people are running robust campaigns.
This doesn’t seem like such a big deal. At least all three candidates are real people, unlike in this recent poll of presidential candidates.
Whoever funded this poll with hopes of discerning information about the W2 race wasted their money. The results will not be statistically significant: the alignment of a low turn-out rate for off-mayoral municipal elections and a low answer rate from landlines means that it is impossible to get a representative sample of the likely voting population for the 2015 W2 election.
I just heard about this this afternoon, and haven’t been home to potentially get called. Did anyone get the script, or better yet, a recording? (Must now answer phone when home, even though it will probably be bogus electric company 🙁 )
I think this has to be a bogus push poll, or possibly someone trying to make it look like a push poll. Why would a worried incumbent not be polling for actual conditions, a five-way preliminary? If you’re polling to learn, why would you want skewed results? And why poll for a three-way race when the November election will be four-way?
And, by the way, based on the desperate onslaught of maximum-length letters to the Tab being cranked out in support of the incumbents, I wouldn’t assume they’re both confident of making it through the preliminary.
Though I am somewhat pleased to know whoever did this is threatened enough to resort to manipulation, it is a pathetic display of corrupt politics and reiterates the need for change in Newton.
@Jake: Exactly. Given your analysis, which assumes that the intent of the poll was to discern information about the Ward Two race, another way of looking at the poll was that it was conducted to deceive voters of the fact that there are five competitive candidates in the race.
Did you or anyone affiliated with your campaign fund/conduct this poll?
Jess I just said the poll was a waste of money for whomever funded it. That should be clear enough for most people, but let me be even more clear for your sake: My campaign had absolutely nothing to do with it. @Lynne: Well said.
Good evening all. This gets curiouser and curiouser. I didn’t cause this poll. I did enjoy answering it!
If it turns out the one of the five candidates/campaigns is behind this, we should actually eventually discover who because it should show up on a campaign finance report. So far, we’ve heard from four of the five candidates. Two have said it wasn’t them. Lynne and Jess, for the record. perhaps you could confirm as well. Alderman Johnson, it would be great to hear from you too.
@Julia: There were 10 questions. I don’t have the exact wording, so I’m paraphrasing:
1. Are you certain to vote, you might vote, unlikely to vote?
2. Is Newton headed in the right/wrong/no opinion direction?
3. Do you have a favorable/unfavorable/no opinion opinion of Setti Warren?
4. Three candidates are running for alderman in Ward 2 at large. Voters can select two. Would your first choice be Susan Albright, Marcia Johnson, Jake Auchincloss or undecided.
5. Would your second choice be Susan Albright, Marcia Johnson, Jake Auchincloss or undecided?
6. Do you support/oppose/no opinion Austin Street?
7. Do you support/oppose/no opinion a development at Washington and Walnut Street?
8. Do you consider yourself a Democrat, Republican or independent?
9. Age
10. gender
@Jess
I’m suprised you didn’t ask the incumbents, so I will.
@Ward2 at large incumbents – do you have any knowledge to share regarding this?
Maybe H.L. Dewey did the poll. 😉
@Julia: Could be. HL did seem to have some sort of crush/infatuation on/with Jake.
Jess and Lynne should do their own poll!
Greg – I think question 5 (second choice) might have given a “no second choice” option – maybe trying to get at bullet voting?
@Tricia: Could be. As I said, I’m just paraphrasing. I was unable to take notes during the call.
I have no idea who did this. As Alderman Albright said…this get curiouser and curiouser.
@Julia.
HL strikes me a too much of a gentleman to be involved in this.
You’ve got to wonder if somebody involved in pro Austin St. might be involved though.
@Simon: Sure. It could be a shadowy pro Austin Street person looking so see where they should throw their support (except Auchincloss is allegedly opposed to Austin Street so what exactly would they learn?).
Or could it be a shadowy anti-Austin Street person wanting to know who is the most vulnerable of that three so they can focus on defeating them in hopes of getting Barton and LeBlanc on the November ballot.
Or maybe it was just a prankster looking for, as Fignetonville suggests, “blog bait.” Perhaps Gail? Or Jerry?
@Jake: All I know is that if it were my name included on this poll, which was clearly intended to deceive voters, my immediate actions would have been to 1) reach out to the other candidates to say that I had nothing to do with it, and 2) make expressly clear when posting here that I nor anyone affiliated with my campaign had anything to do with it. You did neither. I’m disappointed that you’re trying to insult me with your snarky response, but to be clear, saying that “Whoever funded this poll with hopes of discerning information about the W2 race wasted their money” does not equate to saying you did not do it. If in fact the intent of the poll was to deceive voters, it very well could have been money well spent.
@Greg: For the record, I certainly did not have anything to do with this poll nor did anyone affiliated in any way with my campaign. I do, though, very much appreciate you making us all aware of it.
@Lynne: Couldn’t agree more.
@Greg,
Could have been you too 🙂
Nah. If I did it, I would have said the only three candidates were Albright, LeBlanc and Barton…just to really mess with everyone’s heads.
Very strange.
We know that Greg and Susan Albright were called. Anyone else?
It would also be interesting to know if the Mayor or anyone associated with him or his office had anything to do with it. The questions seem to be broader than just the W2 race.
Give me a break, Charlie. The Mayor never ran a poll for either of his own campaigns.
I need to get myself a landline just so I won’t miss out on shadowy Newton push polls. Did anyone check the caller ID? Could always google the number that comes up and see if you can track down the pollster it’s attached to.
@Bryan: The recording included the name of the firm at the beginning but I missed it. Said they were calling from Chicago.
@Jane-
No break needed. It’s a fair question considering the questions being asked in the poll, and as a teacher you are well aware that it is always better to ask more questions and gain as much knowledge as possible.
I was also among the chosen…My immediate thought was that it was Jake’s doing. Why, I kept asking? What could he learn from this annoying deception? I always try following the money…
I wondered whether the tree-structure of some polls (not everybody gets the same questions, you know, depending on how they answer each one in sequence) determined who the candidates listed would be. However, it seems that all of us got the same questions that Greg listed. I noticed the Caller I.D. It was Chicago. And I heard at least part of the research organization’s name: It was ????? Opinion Research Center. Now I know that the National Opinion Research Center is located in Chicago and that they are a reputable organization affiliated with the University of Chicago. It may well have been a poll they were paid to conduct. OK, sleuths…let’s think bigger and more paranoid…could it have been, shudder, the GOP or the Dems, (perhaps at the State or National level) who spent their monies to see what locals in a town with majority unaffiliated voters really want? Why say there were only 3 candidates? Any local would know there would be 4 candidates after the Preliminary! Curioser and curioser…are we falling through the looking glass?
Thoughtful questions, Charlie. The student whose hand is always waving in the air isn’t usually the one with the most insightful comment or question and if a student asks a loaded question or one that’s off topic, I will surely call her/him on it.
Greg – I know you were paraphrasing, but did the poll actually say, “Three candidates are running for alderman in W2…”?
That’s my very clear recognition. But other who received the call are reading this. Please correct me if I’m mistaken.
Sallee mentioned NORC as a possibility. If it was them, their website says when they make calls:
“NORC telephone interviewers will identify themselves with their first and last name, as well as the name of the project or sponsor, the purpose of their call, and ask to speak with a specific member of your household. ” (source: http://www.norc.org/WorkingWithNORC/Pages/survey-participants.aspx)
Polls are rarely in the field for only one night. Everyone should keep their ears open over the next couple days and make sure to catch the name of the polling organization and the sponsor if possible.
It was a robo poll, not an actual human asking the questions.
Again, this is all very interesting, but I’m bemused by the reaction to it more than anything else. Some of the verbiage on here “terrible” “pathetic displays of corrupt politics”, and the blame of the various candidates or causes…c’mon folks. So much drama for such a little thing.
Just think what would happen if someone was actually critical!?!? Our collective heads would explode!
I look forward to getting this particular poll. Should be fun.
@Jane-
The question is valid. Let’s not be afraid to ask it.
My teachers always used to say there is no such thing as a stupid question!
Fig-If you’d put your heart and soul into a campaign, then had a paid call to who knows how many voters with the express intention of deceiving them into thinking you weren’t on the ballot, you might feel differently. I experienced similar tactics and it doesn’t stop until you stand up them and make them squirm.
1. I think there are questions in this poll that were intended to distract people from its real purpose.
2. Seems like a lot of money for a W2 candidate to spend on fairly useless information.
3. I can’t see the ROI for Jake either. (I believe him that it wasn’t his poll.)
My recollection is the same as Greg’s – “there are 3 candidates”. It stood out to me. They also gave a number to call with questions at the end, but I didn’t catch it.
Lassy – I would never call a question “stupid” and I didn’t. However students can and do ask leading questions that are intended to embarrass other students or make them look bad. I don’t allow that in my class.
What Gail said.
So, who authorized it?
Greg – I believe it did say something like “there are three candidates running for the Ward 2 …..” I thought i remembered it saying something like CD research or some letters that started with a C.
It would be interesting if this showed up in a candidate’s financials. Are these types of polls costly?
I just Googled a robo poll company and found that the approximate cost to reach 1500 people with about 10 questions would be about $2500.
Sallee — I could be wrong but I think I’ve been told that 300 is a good sample size in Newton.
Just for the record — not accusing — it would be good if LeBlanc could also confirm that she is not behind this. I ask only because the other four candidates have already said as much and eventually we should find out.
@Greg Absolutely not.
I’m liking Gail’s theory that the W2 questions may have been a distraction. (LOOK OVER THERE!) We’re all talking about who would do such a stupid/devious/misleading poll about the W2 race, instead of, for example, wondering about the validity of a question about development at Washington and Walnut — something the vast majority of people have probably not even heard of, let alone know it involves a five-story building. (Because, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think there’s been anything in the Tab, right?)
I’ve also been wondering what the sample size for a valid citywide poll is, and what are the odds, for a given sample size, that so many people we know would have gotten the call. Anyone who’s a regular V14 commenter is no doubt a regular voter, so would be more likely than the average person to get polled, but still… If the sample size is as low as 300, what are the odds it hits Greg and Tricia, and Susan Albright, and I believe Lynne got the call, too? Any statisticians out there? It’s been a long time since my last Probability & Statistics course.
I wrote down the following numbers for the poll. I didn’t write down the area code but I thought it was 617. 284-2084. I’m sure I have some of those numbers wrong because I tried calling it and it was not a valid number. However, if others also have part of the number perhaps we can get a complete number
You have to factor in that those who don’t have land lines didn’t get the call. I wonder how that would skew the answers. I know plenty of people who only have cell phones, but have no idea of their prevalence in Newton.
Julia, it does seem a sample of 300 would be too small for your example.
I recently became aware of the discussion of this poll on this site. I would like to make clear that the poll was commissioned by my firm, Northwind Strategies, for a non-political client. We do these kinds of polls often in order to get a sense of opinions on certain issues in local communities. I apologize for any confusion and any mistakes that were included in the poll.
Thanks for weighing in Doug.